About your Search

20130801
20130831
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16
believe the economy was so messed up by george bush that obama struggled mightily to overcome this horrible situation he inherited. the second reason is most americans believe republicans only care about rich people. and those are branding problems that the republican party has to to overcome. and it's hard to overcome it because you've got three obstacles; academia, hollywood and our major media, all of which are overwhelmingly liberal. when you say something, it's got to be interpreted through the filter of those three entities, and often it's been distorted. >> host: larry elder is our guest, this is booktv on c-span2 live from the los angeles times festival of books, campus of usc. mike's in fort worth, texas. hi, mike. >> caller: how's it going, larry? my -- pretty good. i'm a african-american democrat, but i agree with you one of the big problems in the african-american community is lack of fathers in the house. but i think, larry, when you say that, you kind of come off kind of harsh on black people. now, what's the reason behind the lack of a lot of fathers being in th
of texas does recently because of the leadership though shown by george w. bush, is that when you look at states like arizona, not typical in arizona, but i was just thinking alabama, arkansas' next. if you look at arizona, if memory serves arizona export something like $50 billion a year. if you look at texas can we export $206 billion a year. 35% of those exports go directly to mexico. i think george w. bush understood the tenuous but important relationship that has to exist with our neighbors to the south. i think he was very strategic and smart in building and growing and fostering a relationship over time. and today, texas is benefiting from his leadership back then. a large proportion of the hispanic owned firms in this state and minority owned firms in the state are actually owned by mexican nationals. and so this didn't happen by accident. it happened because very strategic visionary leadership happened two, three decades or a decade ago. now we are benefiting from the. >> creating an environment. >> absolutely. doesn't happen overnight. now you see other states beginning to re
on their taxes. >> up next, george w. bush institute resale the series of discussions looking at immigrants contributions for america. this panel focuses on the economic effects of naturalization. from dallas, this is about one hour. >> a pleasure to be here. i worked for closed with president bush when he was in the white house trying to advance immigration reform in the last battle and so it's a pleasure for me to be back in his beautiful new house, talking about immigration. so thank you to this institute. i want to harken back as we get started to the ceremony that we saw this morning combat incredible moving ceremony because what we're going to talk about here today is not just out immigration is good for america, but have naturalization and citizenship actually even ups the ante and makes immigrants even more beneficial for the united states. to benefit themselves, but it's also a benefit for the country. so the very people we saw this morning when they came in the door, they were great for america but as they went out the door their even more. they will be even more of an asset. we w
served as the chief economist of the council of economic advisers under president george bush. manuel pastor is the professor of sociology in american studies and ethnicity at the university of southern california. he's also the director of their program on environmental and region aleck bity -- regional equity, and for our purposes today most importantly, codirector of the center for the study of immigrant integration. and he's published a couple of reports recently that he'll bring to light today about the importance of citizenship. jose antonio vargas is a pulitzer prize-winning journalist, film maker and the founder of define american, a campaign that seeks to elevate the immigration conversation. he is another profile in courage. in 2011 in "the new york times" magazine, he publicly revealed himself as undocumented and shared his life story of being raised by his grandparents in the u.s. from the age of 12 when he left his birthplace in the philippines. he has since become a national immigrants' rights advocate and leader for comprehensive immigration reform activist including th
a job in america to read >> republican with caller. >> caller: why did george bush wants to sell parts and then sell to you guys before and? >> host: i don't know if you remember in 2004 the company wanted to buy a port in the united states to be a >> guest: i certainly remember that. >> guest: we've remember to privatizing and had several bids at the time and decided to keep it state-owned. >> guest: that is also true. the caller is referring to when there was a discussion locally about actually selling the port to the company that was foreign controlled and that came to a halt and i thought that was the right thing at the time. >> what does it mean that this is a state-owned entity versus having a private company? >> guest: it is run in the public good and you have to maximize short-term profits. we can look at the long term benefits over the agenda and that is one thing i am delighted we have not. we have to consider all but now it is in control of the quarterly dividend. >> i don't know if you know the answer to this is the court sustained by the revenues? >> 100% sustained by the
hardly ever come up. they were attacking dick cheney, attacking george bush with, attacking the fbi and others, nsa had pretty much been unscathed in all this. the only time it really came up as a matter of debate in the intelligence committee was people from the nsa coming forward and saying what a rough time they were having with the fisa court, how hard it was for them to get court orders, how hard it was to be able to follow up on the information they were getting. this is not a rubber stamp. this is constantly scrutinized. it's also scrutinized by the house and senate intelligence committees. i worry saying congress is keeping an eye on it for you isn't exactly a vote of confidence. but, seriously, people on the intelligence committee take it very seriously. i can tell you that this stuff is looked at very, very carefully. so i think we have to keep all of this in mind. i don't see any significant violation of civil liberties. i don't see any significant -- to me, if we have a balanced thought like with zazi in 2009, zazi, and this is one of those forest gump moments where you
for. george w. bush had done that i think he would've been, we would've been heard cries of impatient. we had part of our immigration laws suspended by the president. there's just a variety of issues like that when he is gone outside. we have tension with our system, struggles between congress and the president. this one is very safe. i think you'll see it continue. but there will be legal cases. >> i'm going to try to bounce around a little bit but again we will get to everybody. >> i was a little concerned to find that you are not in support of making the continuing resolution contingent upon removing what optional spin you move on obamacare. i feel very strongly. i speak from a point of view -- [applause] >> i think they do, too. >> this is not theoretical for me because two weeks ago today my husband and i paid in cash for our son had major surgery. for our procedure. but, you know, what? that's a price i paid for the liberty of my children. i'm self-employed. i understand the consequent of that as i've limited options thanks our government on insurance. i understand that i paid f
the reasoning behind why george bush wanted to sell the ports and did he contact beforehand? >> host: i think he is referring to, 2004 at the dubai company wanted to buy a port in the united states. >> guest: i certainly remember that. >> guest: we consider privatizing the ports here in norfolk. we had several bids but i think in the fullness of time i decided to keep it stayed on. >> host: what does that mean? >> guest: there was a reason i sent and the caller, that's also true. the color i believe is referring to when there was a discussion here locally about actually selling the port to a company that was foreign controlled and that came to a full hault. >> host: what does it mean to you guys that this is sustained sustained-state-owned entity versus a private company? >> guest: frankly is run in the public good and if it's privately-owned you have to maximize short-term profits. if its government-owned we can look at the long-term benefit to the commonwealth of virginia and i think that is the one thing i am delighted that we did not sell. just being responsible we had to consider all of the
to talk about the cause of this and we took a little bit of heat from the george w. bush campaign is for not being prepared to wage traditional conflict due to the task force is. this would be the most likely vehicle also in the professional military education sphere. the peacekeeping stabilization operation institute and the u.s. army war college in the national defense immigration will continue to be part of this is expertise onto which we can draw. but i do expect good compared to matters. one case study talks about how it took more care can work anywhere. >> we have about six people so far and maybe a few others to try to fit you all in. >> hello, my name is piers martin and i'm here at the georgetown university. my question is related to one of the main ideas which is to broaden our positions and a conflict that was one of the first reactions from the united states is reaction and the european union started. working and building of institutions for common security and defense policy. as there seems to be quite a change of discussion right now because the discussions we are ha
because they were uncontrolled bureaucracies under george bush. i expense them, and he did, too. he goes back to the thing we kind of started out with, is the federal government is out of control. but it's been predicted by all the historians that our republic will fail. so the question is how do we cheat history? how do we go back? how do we really base -- we embrace the things that made america great. as i said earlier i think we have to get in charge. i've been working for nine years to try to make a big difference. i have made a small difference, not a bi big difference. by me, i've worked every day trying to do things. that i'm convinced the only way we do that is the states exert their tenth amendment authority and start reassessing -- [applause] changes to the constitution that restore federalism and a constitutional republic. and so i think that's the way. you are frustrated. you ought to see me in washington. asked by staff. i want people -- ask my wife. i want to pull my hair out. you know, i see it into things. one is, i see the constitution and i see what's happening to it. a
assistant to president george w. bush and principal deputy press secretary. and john verrico, president-elect of the national association of government communicators. so starting with carolyn, let's hear what you have to say, just give us your overview of the subject. >> i'm going to tell you about a couple surveys i've conducted this year and the previous year. that are relevant to the topic we're discussing tonight. first, i surveyed reporters who cover federal agencies here in washington. i've got 146 respondents within margin of error of about 7%. then i surveyed current and former members of the national association of government communicators, about 154 responses for a margin of error of about 4.3%. i'm going to throw some numbers at you but i want to quantify the situation. my questions focus on the interviewing process. first, i want to talk about preapproval and routing. 98% of public affairs officers believe that they have a better idea than reporters about who in their agencies would be the best person to give an interview on a given topic. three quarters of journalists repor
expansion. under george w. bush we expanded the prescription drug part d. i opposed that. i opposed it because there was not a governmental plan available. i thought we should -- there was not universal pricing which i thought would bring down the costs dramatically. i think i'm right about both of those points, by the way. but the day after it was passed, i worked to make sure it was implemented as best we could. we worked together to make it work. and we're not seeing that on the affordable care act. we're seeing almost just a political isolation of this issue just calling it politics rather than trying to make it work the best that you can and seeking changes that you think should be changed. so i'm hoping that we can get to that point, and we can get the resources necessary to make sure this law is implemented fairly. because you're absolutely correct. it's not going to be a one-year implementation of the personal mandate. it's going to take a long time. it's going to take years. we know that. we also don't know what type of group will enroll in the first year. it might surprise
for and what you were responsible for. >> guest: i served under but george w. bush administration and was appointed by the transportation secretary norman. and as you may know, he is a democrat who served in the republican administration and he was responsible for offering and then congress passed a reorganization act that led to the creation of this agency. and this agency fmsa receives a million daily shipments of hazardous air, land, truck, and sea, dessel and pipeline. >> host: you're current work with the national transportation advisers, what is that? >> guest: i am a lawyer by training and we also have a consulting practice. so, we talk infrastructure projects, transportation projects to both public and private sector clients. >> host: is one of your clients keystone xl? is anybody supporting trans canada? >> guest: no, sir. >> host: as far as keystone xl is concerned, the decision that you were taking, where do you stand if it shouldn't be built on the extension we've been talking about? >> guest: i've been monitoring this for several years. when i was at the d.o.t. the or
, and that is former president george h.w. bush. i've had, i had a chance to work with him, incredible leader, an incredible human being who has given so much back to the community. as president of the united states, but as former president of the united states. so i am honored to stand in for him today. he apologizes, but -- [laughter] we've been talking a lot about work force and whether we have the right people in lace to provide the services -- in place to provide the services. you're the front line. you're the absolute front line. and for people to be able to get quality, affordable health care, they have to be able to come through that door and be accepted and have confidence that they're going to be treated with the care that they expect. and you have provided that. and you have done that as a volunteer. which is just remarkable from the point of view of if we could clone you and have you throughout -- [laughter] it would make life a lot easier. we've talked a lot also about how do you get people into the system, and you personally have gotten people into the system because of the mann
terrorism was partially because george w. bush hated in the muslim world. despite his speech in cairo, despite his efforts to close guantanamo, despite his elimination of the use of the term war on terror, al qaeda continues to hate america. and even as i speak to you here today, they continue to plan attacks against america here and around the world. the president's not alone in failing to confront these threats. i'm afraid because of the success we've had in preventing another attack on the scale of 9/11, some of our leaders in both parties have been lulled into a sense of false security. i certainly support the privacy rights and expectations of all americans. but my colleagues, i also know for a fact that the surveillance programs that our government used have prevented attacks and saved american lives. i think it's a mistake to dismiss privacy concerns as crazy. after all, we have a government whose tax collecting agency targeted americans because of their political views. but it's also a mistake to exaggerate them. after all, if a known terrorist is e-mailing or calling someone
like, why the indonesian military shoot our church? they appeal to president george h.w. bush, and appealed to the eun, and marched through the streets, retracing the steps of the funeral two weeks before. some putting their hands up in the v sign-chanting, viva east timor, viva independence, incredibly brave. and i that marched from schools and home and march to the santa cruz cemetery. when we got there we were interviewing people. why are you risking your life to do this? and they would say, for my mother. for my father. for my village. it was wiped out. and then from the direction the procession has come we saw hundreds of indonesian soldiers carrying their u.s. m-16s at the ready position marching up on the crowd. 90% of the weapons used were from the united states. the army was armed, trained and financed be the united states. and in this day it was no different. the soldiers marched up ten to 12 abreast. alan and i were interviewing people in the middle of the crowd. and allen suggest we walk to the front of the crowd, because we knew that the indonesian military commit
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16